|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
316
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 18:20:18 -
[1] - Quote
Mierin Arthie wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:We would like to clarify that it does not matter how Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing are being done, whether through use of software or modified hardware. Our only concern is regarding how it is being used in the EVE universe. How does this policy update regard the usage of KVM switches to control multiple computers from one mouse/keyboard? for those that dont know what a kvm switch is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KVM_switch
That would be keyboard multiplexing. The definitions in the OP are pretty clear.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
316
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 18:22:39 -
[2] - Quote
What part of "it doesn't matter nhow the broadcasting or multiplexing is accomplished" was unclear to you?
It's really not that difficult to understand ladies and gentleman. If you press 1 key and 1 client responds you're fine. If you press one key and more than one client responds, you're ******.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
316
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 18:24:49 -
[3] - Quote
Gina Taroen wrote:lol wonder how many people will quit because of this :D
None of the ones that care about the game.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
318
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 18:26:29 -
[4] - Quote
marly cortez wrote:The Sandbox ....What can be will be......except when we decide it's not to be. Compliments of CCP...
You don't understand the term sandbox.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
318
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 18:34:28 -
[5] - Quote
Makhpella wrote:Hi CPP if I warp squad do I get banned?
Stop being deliberately obtuse.
Tool.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
318
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 18:35:49 -
[6] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:Examples of allowed Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing are actions taken that do not have an impact on the EVE universe and are carried out for convenience:
GÇóEVE Online client settings GÇóWindow positions and arrangements (of the EVE Online client in your operating systemGÇÖs desktop environment) GÇóThe login process [/i] Emphasis added. I'm confused by why this would be something you would ever have to expressly say you're not trying to control, unless you're simultaneously of the opinion that you could. Is CCP actually claiming they have the right to police where I put my client window on my desktop?
No dumbass, they're making it expressly clear that they aren't banning any one product or service (i.e. ISBoxer, which allows for client window position control), but rather a particular set of functionality.
I swear the amount of sideways, bent ass thinking going on in this thread is astounding.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
319
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 18:37:27 -
[7] - Quote
Zishy Linaris wrote:goodbye ccp. 12 accounts unsubbed as of now. i feel bullshitted for my time i invested but **** happens
Stuff. Yours. Geif.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
319
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 18:39:47 -
[8] - Quote
Rear Admiral Charlie wrote:To everybody complaining about isboxer I hope your ready to strap a miner to your ass because mineral prices are going to spike.
Good. I can sell off some of my stockpiles.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
326
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 19:02:20 -
[9] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Big +1 on the decision, but I'm worried it doesn't go far enough. People will just purchase more screens, and manually control multiple accounts. It'll be harder, surely, but it's still viable to manually control a 10 ship tornado gank fleet or procurer mining fleet. The only sure way to get rid of multiboxing, and entitle everyone equally to the actions of one character at a time, is to get rid of multiboxing entirely.
You misunderstand their intentions.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
326
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 19:03:54 -
[10] - Quote
War Kitten wrote:
No, KVM switch is just that - a switch. It connects you to one computer at a time, not multiple.
You're right. My bad - I misunderstood the intention.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
330
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 19:46:07 -
[11] - Quote
War Kitten wrote:Taram Caldar wrote:War Kitten wrote:Mierin Arthie wrote:How does this policy update regard the usage of KVM switches to control multiple computers from one mouse/keyboard? for those that dont know what a kvm switch is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KVM_switch That doesn't broadcast, it just changes where input goes - it should be fine. Wrong it broadcasts a single command to multiple systems Still applies. Seriously people.... reading comprehension No, that's not what a KVM switch does. It is a switch that allows you to select which system to send input to. It's 1:1.
It should also be noted that there ARE keyboard and mouse multiplexers which allow you to broadcast commands to multiple systems at once (I used to use them when I had to do system setups for my employer), and those would be bannable.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
330
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 19:50:52 -
[12] - Quote
Xython wrote:Aerious wrote:Goon tears are the best tears! You may be misunderstanding a different liquid for tears. This is the best news all month.
What other liqui...oh.
Ooohhh.
Oh that's nasty.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
332
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 20:07:07 -
[13] - Quote
Gommel Nox wrote:Aerious wrote:Goon tears are the best tears! Aren't they just? However, there was a matter that I wanted to put to the developers, however I cannot be bothered to read through all thirtysomething pages of this thread to see if you've already addressed it. The matter is this: for the past 11 years I have been a quadriplegic, completely lacking the ability to move my hands above the wrist, including my fingers. I've always said to people in and out of the disabled community that eve online is a fantastic game to play if you have limited mobility. The user interface, coupled with its reliance on the mouse as an input, can make it a fantastic game to play, depending on what adaptive equipment and software you may have. In my own personal case, I have to use voice recognition in order to type. For that I use Dragon NaturallySpeaking, and it's worked fine. However, my lack of mobility has at times translated to **** poor playing, especially in the PVP arena. To address this, I've used custom macros within Dragon NaturallySpeaking, as well as the software say2play, which translates certain voiceCommands into keystrokes. Certain actions like deploying/retrieving drones, Firing on a target that's locked, or even stopping my ship. According to the OP, Software like this is banworthy. So I would like to know, ones and for all, what CCP's position is on adaptive hardware and software for disabled people like myself.
Your best bet on this would be to file a specific petition including as much detail as possible on your setup. Your situation is so unique that I would seek individual clarification.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
332
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 20:08:37 -
[14] - Quote
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:Komi Toran wrote:Curse you, CCP! Now what am I to use to scapegoat all my problems!? AFK Cloaking, Highsec Ganking, Goons, CODE., and General Discussion Trolls are all pretty solid bets. Take your pick.
I would blame you, U@E, but it's obvious you cannot be the cause of my problems, because if you were, you would be unsuccesful at causing the problems in the first place.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
332
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 20:13:11 -
[15] - Quote
Sylphy wrote:This is how a MMO begins to die. Next we'll see is a ban on scamming activities, communicating outside of EVE Voice *Teamspeak/Mumble/etc* and consequently, the birth of World of Warcraft 2.
Go CCP, I can forsee PLEX prices going up by about 150% in the next 3 months.
The logical fallacies in this post are simply breath taking. Go, just go, and never darken our doorstep again.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
337
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 20:59:41 -
[16] - Quote
Angry Ganker wrote:Apo Lamperouge wrote:Boxer banTears, delicious, nutritious and a great source of daily fibre. And more ISK for GoonTards and their CODE puppies :-)
The tinfoil is strong with this one.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
338
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 21:29:16 -
[17] - Quote
Aequitae wrote:Ranger 1 wrote: ISBoxer isn't banned.
Essentially it is. There's no point paying 50 dollar per year for only the permission to rearrange my screens.
Essentially it isn't. It's up to the consumer if the functionality that is allowd is worth the price. That in no way implies that IS Boxer is allowed or not.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
338
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 21:32:17 -
[18] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Quote:That is what I wasn't getting. Not to use broadcast for anything. Why could ccp not explain it as simply as that. I understand now. I can live without using broadcast at all. Thank you kraken11 for explaining that key point I'd missed. With all this trolling going on, and with so many people pretending that "their legitimate use is now banned" to seek attention, it's getting hard to sort out those who misunderstood something basic to the topic from those that understand but are trying to mislead others. Apologies.
I smell a Ranger 1 Presents on this topic.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
342
|
Posted - 2014.11.26 00:59:43 -
[19] - Quote
Balder Verdandi wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:Fonac wrote:So is-boxer is banned?
edit: I Honestly dont care about is-boxer or what it can do, since i've never used it, or met anyone who uses it. But the OP is not very clear on it. isboxer isn't banned. Some of the things isboxer can do are banned. CCP & CSM's ... Posts like this do absolutely zero good. You both need to detail what IS allowed, and what ISN'T allowed. This typical "VagueBook" garbage doesn't fly with any of the players, and a simple explanation detailing what is allowed and what isn't, in a bullet style list, wouldn't have gotten you 40 pages of "please explain what you mean" posts. Seriously, stop beating your heads with boards like in Monty Python and talk to us like adults. We're grown ups, we can handle it. As that was exactly what the first post was (essentially), you're premise is flawed. What happens when they do that is that the people who don't like it spend 40 pages trying to find the edges of the rule so they can try and skirt the spirit while obeying the letter of the rule.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
342
|
Posted - 2014.11.26 01:07:20 -
[20] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Except they already have a massive amount of subjectiveness with their current wording. Just look at how many pages of argument this has spawned.
As to the defender thing, I merely mentioned that because if i didn't, what would happen if someone in a site gets dropped? WOuld he have to take the losses without trying to defend himself?
The only reason this is spawning so much discussion is people are being deliberately obtuse to try and wiggle around it. And your defense argument is a strawman. Let it go before you make yourself look even more foolish.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
342
|
Posted - 2014.11.26 01:15:30 -
[21] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Technical question.. If I train 10 parrots to repeat by voice the commands I give and each one is interpretated by a voice recognition software controlling one computer.. how would that classify? I mean.. besides "sick"
Don't make me call PETA on you. Those ******* are crazy, so please - just stay away from the parrots.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
342
|
Posted - 2014.11.26 01:16:47 -
[22] - Quote
Mechanic Hotz wrote:I think it should be allowed seen as its been legal so far and your paying for your accounts legally
And I think I should be able to challenge you to a duel and shoot you in the face when you insult me. I mean after all that was legal before, so why can't it be legal now?
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
342
|
Posted - 2014.11.26 01:18:25 -
[23] - Quote
Mendeli Vium wrote:so if i understand correctly i can use IS Boxer to tile clients on my comp but not activate mods or navigate with it ?
Yes
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
342
|
Posted - 2014.11.26 01:19:35 -
[24] - Quote
Jared Noan wrote:CCP Falcon wrote:
This includes, but isnGÇÖt limited to:
GÇóActivation and control of ships and modules GÇóNavigation and movement within the EVE universe GÇóMovement of assets and items within the EVE universe GÇóInteraction with other characters
Examples of allowed Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing are actions taken that do not have an impact on the EVE universe and are carried out for convenience:
Reading into this, fleet warping could be considered a banable offence. You want to take out the lawyer talk, so will I.
Just when I thought all the ridiculous arguments had been taken. Oh wait, some gormless bellend already brought this up.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
342
|
Posted - 2014.11.26 01:21:22 -
[25] - Quote
Godren Storm wrote:Fleet Warp would fall under these guidelines. Also the signing of drones to another player would fall under this outline. One account broadcasting a single action to more than one accounts. Food for thought.
Not really, since CCP included those commands inside the game client, I think we can safely assume that their use is ok. Otherwise, they could just delete the command options.
I do wish people would quit using the same dumbass arguments over and over again.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
342
|
Posted - 2014.11.26 01:25:58 -
[26] - Quote
Iyokus Patrouette wrote:Where is this list of Do's and Don'ts regarding Multi... whatever we're calling it.
Kind of seems everything technically has an impact on the game, i'm curious where they're drawing the lines in the sand on this.
FFS, someone even made a damned flow chart. It's not hard. It's really not.
A bitter vet trying to start anew.
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
344
|
Posted - 2014.11.26 01:39:38 -
[27] - Quote
Nemed Bererund wrote:epicurus ataraxia wrote:Nemed Bererund wrote:So no more Eve-Central Market crawler then? Keep making stuff up, You might eventually make some sense. The first post is wonderfully clear. Read it . Oh I did I just want some clarification on third party apps like the Market crawlers that automate search's in the market browser. Through the IGB Quote:This includes, but isnGÇÖt limited to:
GÇóActivation and control of ships and modules GÇóNavigation and movement within the EVE universe GÇóMovement of assets and items within the EVE universe GÇóInteraction with other characters
Since the market data will be available through Crest shortly, I doubt cache scrapers will be of much use going forward.
Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
344
|
Posted - 2014.11.26 01:42:11 -
[28] - Quote
Steppa Musana wrote:I don't understand why this has to apply to mining or ratting. You're going to lose hundreds of subscriptions over this CCP. What a terrible decision this is.
Please place an exception where broadcasting commands to mine rocks, shoot rats, jettison cargo, etc. is all permitted.
No, no, NO, NONONONO.
Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
344
|
Posted - 2014.11.26 01:43:22 -
[29] - Quote
Steppa Musana wrote:CCP can save almost the entirety of their mining alt ISBox subscriptions by allowing us to jettison cargo or move cargo to an Orca using broadcasting. Without that ability it's too much of a hassle to mine and I personally will be retiring my entire fleet over it.
I call that mission accomplished, personally.
Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
344
|
Posted - 2014.11.26 01:48:14 -
[30] - Quote
Hott Pocket wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:Bakla Firoz wrote:I was so shocked when I found out that CCP specifically confirmed multiple times that isboxing to control multiple accounts was allowed. So why the sudden change of heart?
Nothing has changed and therefore you owe those people who have trained up 10, 20, 30, 50(?) accounts a MASSIVE apology. How about those who have recently paid for 3 month (the minimum) subscription on isboxer because you said it was okay? The very least you could do is admit you were wrong. 1 month is minimum. I have 10 accounts. Three of them I will keep forever, because I absolutely love Eve. 7 are ISBoxer miners, paid in full until October 2015. I fully support the (effective) banning of ISBoxer, as it will be easier to be competitive without it. However, will CCP offer ISBoxers with a significant real $$ investment a way out? Perhaps converting unused subs to PLEX, or moving the game time to my other accounts? I understand that the game will change as CCP sees fit, but as the poster above stated, CCP has repeatedly clarified that they are ok with ISBoxer. If it had been a grey area, I would have never started the extra accounts. Here's hoping CCP will make this right...
Why in the name of the Flying Spaghetti Monster's noodly appendages would they need to make anything right? You can still use that game time, whether you choose to do so or not.
Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!
|
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
344
|
Posted - 2014.11.26 01:59:04 -
[31] - Quote
Syllviaa wrote:Dear CCP Falcon,
This is a completely legitimate question. If I perform a suicide gank on a miner using input broadcasting on my lead at 23:59:59 31.12.2014, but the following accounts don't fire until 00:00:00 01.01.2015, will I get banned?
Dear Mr. The Mittani,
In the spirit of Christmas, could you lovely chaps do us all a favor and pod this idiot back to 900,000 skill points before Rhea hits?
Thanks much. Cookies and a nice 25 year old scotch are by the mantle.
Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
344
|
Posted - 2014.11.26 02:05:14 -
[32] - Quote
Syllviaa wrote:Jean Luc Lemmont wrote:Syllviaa wrote:Dear CCP Falcon,
This is a completely legitimate question. If I perform a suicide gank on a miner using input broadcasting on my lead at 23:59:59 31.12.2014, but the following accounts don't fire until 00:00:00 01.01.2015, will I get banned? Dear Mr. The Mittani, In the spirit of Christmas, could you lovely chaps do us all a favor and pod this idiot back to 900,000 skill points before Rhea hits? Thanks much. Cookies and a nice 25 year old scotch are by the mantle. That is a legitimate question. If you're incapable of answering it then would you kindly allow someone who is capable of answering to answer it (Example: Not you).
Hey. Mine was a legitimate request too. What makes you so special that you should get your question answered but I can't get mine? Or it because your avatar is female? Is that it? Is this a reverse discrimination kind of thing? Punish the man for being a man.
Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
349
|
Posted - 2014.11.26 14:43:34 -
[33] - Quote
Ormand Audel wrote:Question: Are we allowed to broadcast, but not duplicate commands? So I could have F1 bound to slot1 on client 1, F2 bound to slot1 on client 2 and so on, without alt tabbing? Not sure if it's possible without duplication, but if it is, is it allowed?
E: For those that say "it doesn't allow broadcasting", my definitions may vary to CCPs.
People, you are making this a lot harder than it needs to be.
If you press a key and one client responds, you are within the guidelines. If you press one key and more than one client responds, you are not.
Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
349
|
Posted - 2014.11.26 14:50:40 -
[34] - Quote
Cannibal Kane wrote:I, Cannibal Kane, Approve this change.
/thread
Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
350
|
Posted - 2014.11.26 16:02:38 -
[35] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote: I'd like to think that, but I can't, because in my eyes, it's highly unlikely that they were merely trying to nerf incursion/wormhole income. If they wanted to do that, then they could just adjust incursions and wormholes. Sure, some people would complain, but no major shift would take place. However, they've nerfed high-sec pvp so much in the past few years that they're running out of ways to nerf things like suicide-ganking without having the community question whether they're still willing to keep EVE a harsh universe, so they're resorting to underhanded tactics like this in order to sneak by changes while riding a wave of populist support. Much like the way governments attach unpopular bills to necessary ones, so no one will notice. That's my take on this, at least.
And yet, according to the CODE members that have posted in this thread, this change will have very little impact on their suicide ganking operations.
So either they are lying or you are wrong about this being a ganking nerf.
Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
351
|
Posted - 2014.11.26 17:59:16 -
[36] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Jean Luc Lemmont wrote:And yet, according to the CODE members that have posted in this thread, this change will have very little impact on their suicide ganking operations.
So either they are lying or you are wrong about this being a ganking nerf.
No, I get it. Like a page or two ago I looked into this some more, and realized that the actual impact will be marginal. However, the fact that CCP is doing this to target (and this is just my own hypothesis) suicide-ganking is troubling.
The plural of anecdote is not evidence.
Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
361
|
Posted - 2014.11.29 20:24:47 -
[37] - Quote
I do hope that the people who are running around screaming "I quit, I quit" actually have the courage of their convictions this time around.
Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!
This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
361
|
Posted - 2014.11.29 21:07:30 -
[38] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Jean Luc Lemmont wrote:I do hope that the people who are running around screaming "I quit, I quit" actually have the courage of their convictions this time around. not quit. farm to play for free like I should have done for a long time now. it means I'm playing more. I need to start ganking too.
I wasn't talking to you in particular Rain, and given a community the size of the GSF, I expect any multiboxers in their ranks to find this change to be annoying at worst. They always were an adaptable bunch.
I'm just tired of the whining masses that react like preschoolers when CCP does something they don't like, toss their toys out of the pram on the forums, but when the rubber meets the road they just keep on doing what they were doing while sulking in the corner and muttering under their breath. The amount of illogical arguments I have seen put forward in this discussion thread (from both sides of the table mind) would be enough to write a case study. I've seen appeals to emotion, slippery slope, appeals to tradition, false dichotomies, and a half dozen other fallacious arguments - and that's just in the last dozen pages.
I suppose I'm just being a crotchety old man, but this happens every time CCP announces changes that negatively impact a popular play style. The nano-nerf, jump fatigue, freighter slots. I expect it will happen again when they finally get around to deciding what to do about the Ishtar. I know it will happen when they finally announce their plans for Sov 3.0.
Some people support the change, other people disapprove, and we end up with a hundred page threadnaught with half the posters threatening to quit because they disagree with the change. There's no need to tell everyone on the forums - just tell your mates so they know you didn't die. By all means, go enjoy the latest BC3K - sorry, I mean Star Citizen - or LOL, or whatever other game you enjoy playing.
If you feel that strongly about it - then unsub. We don't care and we won't miss you.
But if you're going to quit, then quit expeditiously and stop being drama llamas about it.
Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!
This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
361
|
Posted - 2014.11.29 22:05:34 -
[39] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:Jean Luc Lemmont wrote:I'm just tired of the whining masses that react like preschoolers when CCP does something they don't like, toss their toys out of the pram on the forums, but when the rubber meets the road they just keep on doing what they were doing while sulking in the corner and muttering under their breath. The amount of illogical arguments I have seen put forward in this discussion thread (from both sides of the table mind) would be enough to write a case study. I've seen appeals to emotion, slippery slope, appeals to tradition, false dichotomies, and a half dozen other fallacious arguments - and that's just in the last dozen pages. I suppose I'm just being a crotchety old man, but this happens every time CCP announces changes that negatively impact a popular play style. The nano-nerf, jump fatigue, freighter slots. I expect it will happen again when they finally get around to deciding what to do about the Ishtar. I know it will happen when they finally announce their plans for Sov 3.0. Some people support the change, other people disapprove, and we end up with a hundred page threadnaught with half the posters threatening to quit because they disagree with the change. There's no need to tell everyone on the forums - just tell your mates so they know you didn't die. By all means, go enjoy the latest BC3K - sorry, I mean Star Citizen - or LOL, or whatever other game you enjoy playing. If you feel that strongly about it - then unsub. We don't care and we won't miss you. Why is it that when CCP changed jump drives, freighters, nanos, people were not told they couldn't complain, while we are being told we shouldn't object, and that if we do we deserve it? What the hell?
I'm not saying you can't complain. But if you really want to quit the game over it, then just go quietly.
Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!
This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
361
|
Posted - 2014.11.29 23:33:39 -
[40] - Quote
Jay Lancaster wrote:
This thread should be closed. It's serving no purpose anymore.
That, at least, I think we can all agree on.
Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!
This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury
|
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
361
|
Posted - 2014.11.29 23:36:45 -
[41] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote: Victim blaming at it's finest.
It's a game company changing a rule about how they will allow people to play their game, ffs. The people affected by this change are not victims.
Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!
This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
363
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 15:11:05 -
[42] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Jean Luc Lemmont wrote:I'm just tired of the whining masses that react like preschoolers when CCP does something they don't like, toss their toys out of the pram on the forums, but when the rubber meets the road they just keep on doing what they were doing while sulking in the corner and muttering under their breath. Wait, so you're tired of people who's gameplay styles have been effectively removed complaining, yet the fact that this whole change is because a bunch of carebears have been crying because they don't understand how isboxer works, that's OK?
I'm guessing you missed the part in parenthesis where I mentioned both sides were equally guilty.
Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!
This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
366
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 14:34:58 -
[43] - Quote
Buldra wrote:Let me explain how its going to be. From the 1st January, i'm going to be unemployed with about 10 of my previous friends. However, i'm not going to go down without a fight, so in order for me to keep my subs running i'm going to need ISk and your lovely fat haulers and freighters will have to bear the brunt of that. I hope thats ok with you, as I will not be f*ing up your economy too much. I would actually enjoy the game again, as opposed to shooting stupid rats, I will have a lots of fan mail, i'm sure. There are always consequences to actions, and this is going to be mine. Ganking in high sec is legit. I will need 3-6 accounts and i will manually fly all of them, no need for Isboxer either. I'm looking forward to your fan mail and thanks for freeing me from the shackles of incursions, it was getting rather tedious running those bloody things anyhow.... PS. I'm an alt, so see you in Hek, Uitander, Bei Deltole, Aufay, Balle or any 05, 06 near you from the 2nd of JAN 2015 Udema is cesspool so i wouldn't go there
Hmm. People whine about ISBoxer, CCP nerfs boxing. Boxers go suicide gank. People whine about suicide ganking...
At any rate, good luck in your new career, I wish you all the best. May your antimatter fly true and your loot always drop.
Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!
This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
368
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 17:22:05 -
[44] - Quote
Annihlator wrote:I tried to make a Ticket to ask about my own situation as i use a software-based KVM though CiD could only refer me right back to the topic which made me make the whole ticket. Normally when multiboxing i had always used a regular KVM switch (as far as I know, that would still be allowed). The physical KVM has however long-ago died and since 2 years i am using InputDirector which swaps over all my input once i cross my desktop or laptop screen-border. Also when developing cross-platform (i.e. Windows and Linux, ID works on many platforms!) (site for reference; http://www.inputdirector.com/ ) As I am not multiplexing my input, just switching to which computer the input actually goes, I wanted to ask if such a software-KVM is also fine? Wanted to clarify this before the mighty banhammer might strike me while im doing this :)
Again, you need to answer only one question:
When I click a mouse button or press a key on my keyboard, does more than one client react at a time?
If the answer is yes, you have a problem.
If it's no, you're fine - keep calm and carry on.
Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!
This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
373
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 21:14:45 -
[45] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:Revis Owen wrote:The sky's not going to fall on "normal multiboxers", Chicken Little. Clearly easy to distinguish them from bot-aspirant multiboxers. A "normal multiboxer" issues different commands from each client most of the time. In the minority of instances of same command given from each client, the manual alt-tabbing and clicking each time will take beyond nano-seconds. A bot-aspirant multiboxer issues the same command from more than one client within nano-seconds: 10 clients warp to same asteroid belt at nearly same time, 10 clients target an asteroid at nearly same time, 10 clients activate mining module at nealry same time, etc. Except that CCP has already banned multiple people who are using G15s or ISBoxer even though the deadline was Jan 1, so their record is not spotless. And your usage of "bot-aspirant" indicates you have no clue what "bot" means other than "some program I don't like or don't use". Please try to educate yourself.
Actually he used the term bot aspirant correctly. And given that CODE coined the term, I'd be prepared to take their definition over yours pretty much any day.
Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!
This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury
|
Jean Luc Lemmont
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
373
|
Posted - 2014.12.02 14:22:07 -
[46] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Jean Luc Lemmont wrote:Actually he used the term bot aspirant correctly. And given that CODE coined the term, I'd be prepared to take their definition over yours pretty much any day. Considering CODE refer to actively playing players, ones not even multiboxing as being "bot aspirant", and the majority of them are kids looking to grief other players, I'd tend to not take their definition of anything.
Meh, CODE just formalized what was already prevalent in the game and gave it an immersive backstory. They're like yammering puppies - annoying, but easy to avoid if you pay attention.
Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!
This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury
|
|
|
|